Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 11

Strojniki vestnik - Journal of Mechanical Engineering 57(2011)11, 799-809

Paper received: 05.04.2011


DOI:10.5545/sv-jme.2011.077 Paper accepted: 04.10.2011

Structural Analysis of an Articulated Urban Bus Chassis via


FEM: a Methodology Applied to a Case Study
Croccolo, D. De Agostinis, M. Vincenzi, N.
Dario Croccolo* Massimiliano De Agostinis Nicol Vincenzi
DIEM, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Bologna, Italy

This paper deals with the static structural analysis of an articulated urban bus chassis, carried
out with the Finite Elements Method. The purpose of this work is to simulate and forecast the structural
response of the chassis, in terms of stress, strain and displacement, under several loading and constraining
conditions, which aim at reflecting the actual duty cycle of the bus. A thorough interaction with the customer
company allowed the authors to adequately define the loading scheme and to constrain the structure
properly. Sensitivity analyses about FEM parameters have been run, in order to achieve an adequate
trade off between computational time and results accuracy. Obtained results have been double checked by
employing both solid (3D) and shell (2D) elements for each simulation. Eventually, the customer has been
notified of critical issues and the related suggested improvements.
2011 Journal of Mechanical Engineering. All rights reserved.
Keywords: bus, structure, frame, chassis, case study

0 INTRODUCTION wall thicknesses within the range of 2 to 8 mm,


joined each other by full welding; several added
The vehicle under investigation is an bent sheets-ribs increase the overall assembly
articulated bus characterized by a length of 18 stiffness. A structural steel with a Youngs modulus
m, realised by the joining of two chassis (Fig. E = 200 GPa, a Poissons ratio = 0.3, a yield
1), capable of carrying up to 160 passengers and stress Sy = 400 MPa and a mass density = 7,850
with a mass at full load of about 30,000 kg. Urban kg/m3 has been employed. Modern FEM analysis
buses, as most part of passenger vehicles, are built capabilities, mainly in terms of computational
around a tubular chassis that bears both the weight resources, allow the vehicle manufacturer to
of the vehicle itself and the weight of passengers fix structural issues before performing field
and luggage. tests, hence shortening the overall design and
engineering phase, as demonstrated in [1] to [4].
Despites of the noticeable size of the chassis, the
single beam used to realize the chassis is generally
no longer than 1.5 m. Moreover, the displacements
object of investigation are several orders of
magnitude smaller than the overall dimensions of
the chassis. Therefore, an accurate choice of both
the finite elements size and the contact elements
definition is necessary. The analysis is limited to
the sprung part of the vehicle: it is fundamental
to remember that when the bus is performing a
cornering manoeuvre, the centripetal acceleration-
Fig.1. Urban bus and respective chassis force given by the contact between asphalt and
tyres together with the inertia forces acting on
A good chassis shall also meets precise the body, make the suspension springs outside the
stiffness requirements in order to allow a safe curve compress, while those on the opposite side
drive under the most diverse traffic conditions. stretch. This results in a rolling movement of the
The chassis is realized by means of rectangular vehicle body, which must be taken into account
section tubular beams (Fig. 1), having external even when performing a static analysis, because
dimensions within the range of 30 to 150 mm and the gravitational and inertia forces generate
*Corr. Authors Address: DIEM - Facolt di Ingegneria,
Viale Risorgimento 2, 40136 Bologna, Italia, dario.croccolo@unibo.it
799
Strojniki vestnik - Journal of Mechanical Engineering 57(2011)11, 799-809

different stress/strain distributions within the A Cartesian Coordinate System has


structure depending on its position with respect been chosen [5] with its origin into centre of
to a system of coordinates which is fixed to the the articulation system: X-axis is oriented as
ground, as suggested in [5]. Such behaviour could the driving gear, Z-axis is pointing upwards and
be well simulated by a bus model, which included Y-axis follows the right hand rule.
the whole suspensions group [6].
2 FEA SETUP
1 PRELIMINARY REMARKS
The main structural elements of steel
The top level assembly of the chassis framed structures (e.g. the bus chassis, Fig.
consists of about 1,500 parts, which belong to 1) have to be studied as the assembly of three
substructures representing, for instance, the floor, different components, namely, columns, beam and
the roof and the body sides of the chassis. Due to their joints (Fig. 2).
hardware limitations, it would be impossible to
analyze the whole structure (Fig. 1) at one time,
hence the overall assembly has been divided
into two sub assemblies, one being the front half
of the chassis and one the rear part of it: from
now on, they will be respectively referred to as
A-chassis and B-chassis. Such a large structures
would be generally analyzed by introducing
rough approximations mainly concerning the
loading and constraining hypotheses (uniform
loads distributions [7]) or by means of beam (1D)
elements [8]. Fig. 2. Example of steel framed structure: main
The A-chassis, whose two front wheels structural components (column, beam and joint)
are steering while the rear ones are fixed,
comprehends the pilots station: two passengers The capacity of steel frames to resist
doors open on the right side of this chassis. A half loads is determined more by the strength and,
part of the articulation system (the device that in particular, the stiffness of the joints than by
joins the two halves of the bus allowing them to the properties of the members themselves [9]. In
rotate respectively around the vertical axis), is practice, beam-to-column joints in conventional
installed by the rear side of the A-chassis. analysis and design of steel frameworks are usually
The B-chassis has only two wheels on assumed to behave either ideally pinned or fully
the rear and hangs on the A-chassis by means rigid. Conversely, experimental investigations
of the other part of the articulation system. This [10] show that the true behaviour of joints lies in
chassis has no steering devices but it carries the between that of ideally compliant and fully rigid:
engine group on the rear left side: two passengers such joints are referred to as semi-rigid joints.
doors are on the right side. Each chassis has Overestimating the joint stiffness may result in
been analyzed under six different loading and underestimating the forces developed in beam and
constraining schemes (cases), which aimed column and the overall displacement of the global
at simulating the chassis behaviour under the frame structure. Neglecting the real behaviour of
following conditions: the joint may lead to unrealistic predictions of
(a) the action of gravitational acceleration; the response and reliability of steel frames [11]:
(b) the braking at the upper deceleration limit of both of these extreme assumptions are inaccurate
the vehicle; and uneconomic. When approaching the problem
(c) the both sides cornering manoeuvres at the by a numerical (FEM) standpoint the latter issues
capsizing limit; occur in formulating the contact parameters
(d) the both sides torsion due to uneven road between two or more structural members. When
surface. dealing with contacts there is a lot more to control

800 Croccolo, D. De Agostinis, M. Vincenzi, N.


Strojniki vestnik - Journal of Mechanical Engineering 57(2011)11, 799-809

than the mesh size type [12] and in particular the of 12 mm occurs at the same point. Numerical
contact formulation as well as the contact stiffness results in terms of upper beam displacements as
parameters. Finite Elements Analyses have a function of the FKN parameter are reported in
been performed by means of the Ansys Code, Table 1 and shown in Fig. 4: a FKN value between
Workbench Release 12. In order to manage the 0.01 and 0.005 offers a reliable prediction of
contact formulation, the Augmented Lagrangian experimental results.
Method has been chosen as it allows, by manually
setting the contact stiffness parameters, a better Table 1. FEA displacements as a function of the
approximation of the interactions occurring within FKN parameter
the contact areas of welded structures. As a matter
Experimental displacement 12 mm [9]
of fact the Augmented Lagrangian is an iterative
FKN - Normal Stiffness FEA displacement
method working by two consequent steps: firstly, Factor [mm]
like a simple Penalty Method, locally modifying Default (1.0) 8.13
the bodies normal stiffness in the contact region 0.1 8.51
until the equilibrium is satisfied. Then, if any 0.05 8.80
interference (penetration) occurred, it proceeds 0.01 10.68
adding a convenient pressure to the mating 0.005 12.70
surfaces, until the interference is overridden. The 0.001 26.82
contact stiffness parameter (normal or tangential)
can be input as an absolute value (KN or KT) or as
a factor (FKN or FKT) to the default Hertz contact
stiffness KH, which depends on the component
geometry and material. For surface-to-surface
contact elements, Ref. [13] recommends a FKN
value in the range from 0.001 to 100 (default
value 1.0): changes in such range strongly affect
the solution in terms of stresses, strains and
displacements. FKN value shall be tuned by
means of experimental analyses. Experimental
results on a full welded T-joint, comparable in
dimensions and welding method to that used on
the bus chassis (Fig. 3), have been obtained by
Yang and Kim [10].

Fig. 4. Deformed shape (14 magnification) of


the T-joint specimen tested in [9] as a function of
Fig. 3. Full welded T-joint specimen tested in [9]
the contact normal stiffness factor FKN in Table 1
In particular, they established that under
the maximum force (for the linear elastic field) The evaluation of the tensile state in the
of 42.1 kN applied to the upper hinge a deflection vicinity of the weld toe (e.g. hot spot stress method

Structural Analysis of an Articulated Urban Bus Chassis via FEM: a Methodology Applied to a Case Study 801
Strojniki vestnik - Journal of Mechanical Engineering 57(2011)11, 799-809

or the peak stress method recently proposed by As suggested in [16], tubular joints have
Meneghetti et al. [14]) is not the object of this been meshed by using shell (2D) elements that
work. No welds are, accordingly, modelled in the represent the mid-surfaces of the joint member
chassis geometry; the connection between beam walls. As shown previously and as accurately
and column is managed by the contact stiffness demonstrated in [17], the results are perfectly
parameters, as shown in [8]. In order to check the comparable with the ones obtained by means of a
numerical structural stress state of the beam and solid (3D) mesh: the second technique is still ten
column (far from the weld toe), a comparison with times more demanding than the first in terms of
the data evaluated via strain gages in a square-to- disk space.
square hollow section T-joint [14] and [15], has
been performed. Both solid (3D) mesh and shell
3 FEA LOADING CASES
(2D) mesh have been compared to the results
obtained in the reference geometry reported in
Each load applied to the A-chassis as
Fig. 5 [14] and [15].
The applied loads are reported in Fig. 5, well as to the B-chassis has been introduced as a
while the stress results (in terms of maximum lumped mass. These masses undergo acceleration
principal stress as suggested by the peak stress components imposed by the conditions described
method [14]) in Fig. 6. An attentive examination in Section 1, and are attached to one or more
of the results shows that at a distance almost equal surfaces belonging to one or more chassis
to the cross section dimensions (dashed lines) the components. Using lumped masses rather than
stresses evaluated both via 3D mesh and via 2D remote forces results in a speed up of the workflow
mesh (without modeling the weld) converged to when the boundary conditions have to be changed.
the reference one [14] and [15]. For example, the gravitational acceleration can

Fig. 5. The square-to-square hollow section T-joint specimen tested in [13] and [14]
a) b) c)

Fig. 6. Comparison in stress distributions (deformed shape 50x magnification) far from the joint between
beam and column (dashed lines); a) reference geometry [13] and [14] with the welded joint modelled, b)
solid mesh without the weld, c) shell mesh without the weld; mesh size: 1 mm

802 Croccolo, D. De Agostinis, M. Vincenzi, N.


Strojniki vestnik - Journal of Mechanical Engineering 57(2011)11, 799-809

be quickly changed into the forward or lateral line formed by a single edge, can be considered
accelerations acting on the system. equivalent to an ideal hinge that locks rotational
For remote boundaries conditions, such motions around X-axis and Z-axis and translation
as the lumped masses defined, Ansys allows the along each axis. Then, the standard gravitational
control of the specific geometry behaviour, which acceleration g (9.81 m/s2) has been applied to the
can be defined as either rigid or deformable. A whole mass system.
deformable behaviour has been chosen here by
the authors, as it represents the actual response
of the structure well: in fact, on the other hand,
the masses application areas would result in being
unreasonably undeformable.
Since the B-chassis is attached to the
A-chassis by means of an articulation device, the
analyses on the B-chassis were carried out first,
assuming the constraints between the B-chassis
and the A-chassis to be of the hinge type, and to
be applied on the edges of the articulation device. Fig. 7. B-chassis: example of distributed masses
Accordingly, when performing the corresponding related to the main body structure
analysis the reaction forces of the same magnitude
evaluated on the articulation device were applied,
but opposite in direction to the A-chassis.
The results in terms of total displacement
and Von Mises equivalent stress distribution have
been computed and analyzed for each condition.
Constraint reactions in magnitude and
direction have been checked to be equal to the
imposed loads in magnitude and direction as an
overall verification of the simulation process.

3.1 B-Chassis

At first, lumped masses (represented as


spheres) have been applied to the chassis. In Fig.
7, for instance, 2,950 kg of distributed masses Fig. 8. B-chassis loads and constraints loading
belonging to coatings and body panels are shown: case 3.1.2
each sphere has the same color of its target parts. 3.1.2 B-Chassis, Gravitational Acceleration and
Masses related to onboard systems, windows Braking Deceleration
and doors (1,046 kg) and those belonging to
passengers mass (4,931 kg) have been, instead, In order to simulate the effects of a severe
represented in Fig. 8. The 1,500 kg engine mass brake, a 0.75g acceleration [5] and [18] has
has been subdivided into three lumped masses: been added along the positive X direction. The
each of them has been applied to the relevant gravitational acceleration still acts on the system.
engine mount on the chassis. The B-chassis self Moreover, the rear axle edges constraints have
weight is 1,658 kg. been redefined according to Fig. 8, allowing them
to translate only along X-axis (Z-axis and Y-axis
3.1.1 B-Chassis, Gravitational Acceleration displacements are still equal to zero). At the same
time, braking forces F (Eq. (1)) have been applied
Fixed supports have been applied both to to the lower edges of the rear axle (see Fig. 8, flag
the rear axle edges and to the articulation device D and E), by imposing the Coulomb friction law
edges: this type of constraints, since applied to a [18] to [20]:

Structural Analysis of an Articulated Urban Bus Chassis via FEM: a Methodology Applied to a Case Study 803
Strojniki vestnik - Journal of Mechanical Engineering 57(2011)11, 799-809

F = FZr,B . (1) when subjected to this loading case: both of the


rear constraints must have positive reactions along
This hypothesis considers the rear wheels
Z-axis.
subjected to the braking force F, while the front
articulation edges hold up the remaining X-axis
3.1.4 B-Chassis, Torsion
force Rx given by Eq. (2) (Fig. 8a):
Rx = mB-chassis0.75g F . (2) The chassis could be subjected to torsion
when, for example, the bus should run on an
Such a constraint scheme produces the uneven asphalt mat. In order to recreate such a
highest stresses and displacements on the structure condition, two analyses have been performed,
because the whole B-chassis is subjected to both
suppressing two of the total four constraints at a
the bending moment and the compression force
time and applying the sole standard gravitational
generated by the inertial loads. Conversely, in
acceleration. The supports to be suppressed
the two remaining schemes (Figs. 8b and c) loads
have been chosen as follows: (i) left articulation
and moments are partially supported by the rear
constraint and right rear axle constraint; (ii) right
constraint and, therefore, they are not affecting the
articulation constraint and left rear axle constraint.
central section of the frame.
In this way, the chassis could twist around
Since FZr,B changes during the brake
depending on the load transfer from the rear axle the axis that joints the remaining supports.
to the front support [21] and [22], the correct
FZr,B value has been determined by some iterative 3.2 A-Chassis
analyses: firstly, the vertical constraint reaction
on the rear axle are determined from the static Lumped masses were applied to this chassis
equilibrium (FZr,B_1) and the simulation has been and for the B-chassis: 2901 kg of distributed
run using F = FZr,B_1, then the actual vertical masses belonging to coatings and body panels,
constraint reactions on the rear axle (FZr,B_2) has 494 kg related to windows and doors, 5822 kg
been calculated. A new simulation has been run belonging to passengers and the driver and 1540
again assuming F = FZr,B_2 and calculating the kg related to relevant systems have beenw applied
actual vertical constraint reactions on the rear to the chassis. The A-chassis self weight is 2252
axle (FZr,B_3). The same procedure of assuming kg.
F = FZr,B_i and calculating the actual vertical
constraint reactions (FZr,B_i+1) lasted until no
significant discrepancy has been found between
two subsequent values of FZr,B (FZr,B_i FZr,B_i+1).

3.1.3 B-Chassis, Gravitational Acceleration and


Cornering
Fig. 9. A-chassis loads and constraints loading
Since the chassis is not symmetric about case 3.2.1
XZ-plane (see Fig. 7), two simulations have been
run in order to evaluate the effects of both right
and left cornering manoeuvres performed on a
plain ground. Since the standard gravitational
acceleration is always present, an acceleration
vector having a magnitude of 0.75g and directed
along Y-axis, (positive or negative depending
on the turning direction) has been added to the Fig. 10. A-chassis loads and constraints loading
system. The constraints remain the same used for case 3.2.2
the brake simulation. It is important to verify that
the rear axle reactions provided by the analysis As mentioned before, the reactions on the
exclude any capsizing tendency of the vehicle articulation device edges have beencarried over

804 Croccolo, D. De Agostinis, M. Vincenzi, N.


Strojniki vestnik - Journal of Mechanical Engineering 57(2011)11, 799-809

from the analyses performed on the B-chassis 3.2.4 A-Chassis, Torsion


(opposite in direction), as shown in Figs. 9 and 10.
Two torsion analyses have been performed
3.2.1 A-Chassis, Gravitational Acceleration also on the A-chassis by suppressing two of the
four supports at a time and applying the standard
Fixed supports have been applied both to gravitational acceleration. The supports to be
the rear and to the front axle edges: this type of suppressed have been chosen as follows:
constraints is equivalent to an ideal hinge locking (i) Left front axle constraint and right rear axle
rotational motions around X-axis and Z-axis constraint;
and translation along each axis. The standard (ii) Right front axle constraint and left rear axle
gravitational acceleration g (9.81 m/s2) has been constraint.
applied to the system. In this way, the chassis can twist around
the axis that joints the remaining supports.
3.2.2 A-Chassis, Gravitational Acceleration and
Braking Deceleration 4 FEA RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In order to simulate the effects of a severe The sum of the external loads applied
brake, a 0.75g acceleration has been added to the structure and the sum of the constraints
along the positive X direction. The gravitational reactions have been compared for each analysis
acceleration still acts on the system. Moreover, in order to evaluate the overall equilibrium of
braking forces have been applied to the lower the chassis and, therefore, exclude macroscopic
edges of the rear axle, which have been allowed to errors affecting the results. The resume of such
translate along X-axis, while the front axle edges verification is reported in the Appendix at the
have been locked towards the three components of end of the manuscript: the results are subdivided
translation. As for the B-chassis, such constraining into four kinds of loading cases (vertical, braking,
hypotheses make the chassis working under the cornering, torsion) respectively, for the A-chassis
worst condition of free deflection length. Braking and B-chassis in terms of constraints or external
forces intensity defined by iteration, as was loads direction and magnitude. As shown in the
formerly done for the B-chassis. Appendix, discrepancies are always lower than
0.3%. A stress limit equal to Sl = 150 MPa (safety
3.2.3 A-Chassis, Gravitational Acceleration and factor of 2.6 with respect to the yield limit), has
Cornering been chosen in accordance with the customer: the
multiaxial stress states have been compared with
Since the chassis is not symmetric about the uniaxial material properties by means of the
XZ-plane (the passenger doors are located on Von-Mises yield criterion. Even if static analyses
the right side), two simulations have been run have been performed, Meznar and Lazovic
in order to evaluate the effects of both right and [23], Lan et al. [24] and Kim et al. [25] have
left cornering manoeuvres performed on a plain demonstrated the importance of these preliminary
ground. The standard gravitational acceleration FEA results for further experimental analyses
still acts on the system, together with an (e.g. strain gauges as deep demonstrated in [23])
acceleration vector directed along Y-axis with a performed on typical duty cycles.
0.75g magnitude (positive or negative depending
on the turning direction). 4.1 A-Chassis
The constraints are still the same used
for the brake simulation. The rear axle reactions The A-chassis has a good overall response
provided by the analysis exclude any capsizing to every imposed loading condition, since no
tendency of the vehicle when subjected to this significant area of it exceeded the established
loading case: in fact both of the rear constraints equivalent stress limit Sl. Braking and cornering
have positive reactions along Z-axis. conditions, according to [23], are the most severe
because stresses show up close to Sl, interesting

Structural Analysis of an Articulated Urban Bus Chassis via FEM: a Methodology Applied to a Case Study 805
Strojniki vestnik - Journal of Mechanical Engineering 57(2011)11, 799-809

a) b)
Fig. 11. Stress distributions in A (a) and B (b) chassis in most severe (cornering) loading condition

different areas depending on the loading case. 4.2 B-Chassis


Some chassis portions underneath the floor and
close to the articulation device are impacted by Left-cornering loading case (Fig. 11b)
the effects of braking with Von-Mises stress mean is the most severe condition for the B-chassis
values of about 100 MPa (Fig. 11a), essentially as well, causing wide areas of the tubular beam
due to forces transmitted by the B-chassis via the shown in Fig. 16a, which appreciably exceed the
articulation device itself. The right side pillars and equivalent stress limit Sl, as Von-Mises stresses on
the J-shaped tubular beams, which connect the such component assume values close to 190 MPa.
roof to the right body side, have stress values of Indeed, such a beam had been noticed to be a
about 130 MPa when the left-cornering loading critical component for all the loading cases since it
case is applied. It is worth mentioning that stresses has the highest stress values in the whole structure.
recorded in the right-cornering loading case Therefore, the original 3 mm thick beam has been
are much lower than those of the left-cornering replaced with a 5 mm thick one, and a new left-
cornering simulation has been performed in order
loading case only due to the left-side being stiffer
to validate the change. During the cornering
than the right-side, as a consequence of a lack of
manoeuvres the stress value on the body-side
door holes on the right.
pillars results of about 140 MPa, as reported in
The rooftop area has demonstrated to
Fig. 16b, which is now an adequate value: hence,
always have the greatest displacement values
the stress decrease for the proposed solution is
, differentiated as a function of the loading
equal to 26%. Elsewhere, the B-chassis shows
conditions: a magnitude of about 6 and 12 mm is a fair behaviour, since stress and displacement
reached when gravity and braking loading cases remain beneath the established limits.
are applied, respectively. The peak values of about The maximum displacement values are
24 and 18 mm are reached for cornering and for located on the front left engine support ( = 9
torsion respectively. The deformed shapes of the mm) when braking loads are applied (Fig. 13) and
structure, due to the applied loads, are reported on the rooftop ( = 11 mm) when gravity loads are
in Figs. 12 to 15, with an appropriate scale applied (Fig. 12). Eventually, during the cornering
factor (20 magnification). As the performances to the left (Fig. 14) a peak value of about 27 mm is
in terms of stresses and displacements of the reached on the rooftop, which becomes about 33
A-chassis have been judged to be compliant with mm when torsion occurs (Fig. 15). As mentioned
the specifications, no structural improvement has before some images of the deformed structure due
been suggested to the customer. to the different loading cases, are reported in Figs.
12 to15.

806 Croccolo, D. De Agostinis, M. Vincenzi, N.


Strojniki vestnik - Journal of Mechanical Engineering 57(2011)11, 799-809

Fig. 12. Total displacements gravity loading case

Fig. 13. Total displacements braking loading case

Fig. 14. Total displacements left cornering loading case

5 CONCLUSIONS

The static structural analysis of an


articulated urban bus chassis, with a total length
of 18 m, has been performed via Finite Elements
Method. The frame behaviour towards four
different loading conditions, representative of its
typical duty cycle, has been analysed: the action of
gravitational acceleration, the braking at the upper
Fig. 15. Total displacements Torsion loading deceleration limit of the vehicle, the cornering
case (scale factor 20) manoeuvres and the torsion due to uneven road

a) b)

Fig. 16. Von-Mises equivalent stress values on the critical beam; a) original beam, b) modified beam

Structural Analysis of an Articulated Urban Bus Chassis via FEM: a Methodology Applied to a Case Study 807
Strojniki vestnik - Journal of Mechanical Engineering 57(2011)11, 799-809

surface. Sensitivity analyses in order to evaluate Composite Structures, vol. 32, p. 345-356,
the welded joint performances have been carried DOI:10.1016/0263-8223(95)00060-7.
out in order to obtain reliable results in terms [8] Gauchia, A., Diaz, V., Boada, M.J.L.,
of stiffness and displacements of the chassis Boada, B.L. (2010). Torsional stiffness and
(steel framed structure). Braking and cornering weight optimization of a real bus structure.
conditions have been demonstrated to be the most International Journal of Automotive
severe, especially on the B-Chassis (the rear one). Technology, vol. 11, p. 41-47, DOI:10.1007/
Needful improvements have been suggested to the s12239-010-0006-4.
manufacturer in order to help achieve the target [9] Elnashai, A.S., Elghazouli, A.Y. (2003).
strength/stiffness characteristics on the whole Seismic behaviour of semi-rigid steel frames.
structure. Journal of Constructional Steel Research,
vol. 29, p. 149-174, DOI:10.1016/0143-
6 REFERENCES 974X(94)90060-4.
[10] Yang, C.M., Kim, Y.M. (2007). Cyclic
[1] Croccolo, D., Cuppini, R., Vincenzi, N. behaviour of bolted and welded beam-to-
(2007). The design and optimization of fork- column joints. International Journal of
pin compression coupling in front motorbike Mechanical Science, vol. 49, p. 635-649,
suspensions. Finite Elements in Analysis and DOI:10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2006.09.022.
Design, vol. 43, p. 977-988, DOI:10.1016/j. [11] Hadianfard, M.A., Razani, R. (2003). Effects
finel.2007.06.016. of semi-rigid behaviour of connection in the
[2] Croccolo, D., Cuppini, R., Vincenzi, N. reliability of steel frames. Structural Safety,
(2009). Design improvement of clamped vol. 25, p. 123-138, DOI:10.1016/S0167-
joints in front motorbike suspension based 4730(02)00046-2.
on FEM analysis. Finite Elements in [12] Lanoue, F., Vadean, A., Sanschagrin, B.
Analysis and Design, vol. 45, p. 406-414, (2009). Finite element analysis and contact
DOI:10.1016/j.finel.2008.11.007. modelling considerations of interference
[3] Croccolo, D., De Agostinis, M., Vincenzi, fits for fretting fatigue strength calculations.
N. (2010). Recent improvements and Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory,
design formulae applied to front motorbike vol. 17, p. 1587-1602, DOI:10.1016/j.
suspensions. Engineering Failure Analysis, simpat.2009.06.017.
vol. 17, p. 1173-1187, DOI:10.1016/j. [13] Ansys Theory Manual 12.0.
engfailanal.2010.02.002. [14] Meneghetti, G., Atzori, B., Manara, G.
[4] Croccolo, D., De Agostinis, M., Vincenzi, (2010). The peak stress method applied
N. (2011). Failure analysis of bolted joints: to fatigue assessments of steel tubular
effect of friction coefficients in torque - welded joints subjected to mode I loading.
preloading relationship. Engineering Failure Engineering Fracture Mechanics,
Analysis, vol. 18, p. 364-373, DOI:10.1016/j. vol. 77, p. 2100-2114, DOI:10.1016/j.
engfailanal.2010.09.015. engfracmech.2010.04.002.
[5] ISO8855 (1991). Road vehicles - [15] Chiew, S.P., Lee, C.K., Lie, S.T., Ji, H.L.
Vehicle dynamics and road-holding (2007). Fatigue behaviors of square-to-
ability. International Organization for square hollow section T-joint with corner
Standardization, Geneva. crack: experimental studies. Engineering
[6] Reimperl, J., Stoll, H., Betzler, J.W. (2001). Fracture Mechanics, vol. 74, p. 703-720,
The Automotive Chassis: Engineering DOI:10.1016/j.engfracmech.2006.06.022.
Principles (2001), II Edition, SAE [16] Lee, M.M.K. (1999). Strength, stress
International, Warrendale. and fracture analyses of offshore tubular
[7] Larrod, E., Miravete, A., Fernndez, joints using finite elements. Journal
F.J. (1995). A new concept of a bus of Constructional Steel Research, vol.
structure made of composite materials 51, p. 265-286, DOI:10.1016/S0143-
by using continuous transversal frames. 974X(99)00025-5.

808 Croccolo, D. De Agostinis, M. Vincenzi, N.


Strojniki vestnik - Journal of Mechanical Engineering 57(2011)11, 799-809

[17] Pey, L.P., Soh, A.K., Soh, C.K. (1995). [22] Genta, G., Morello, L. (2002). The
Partial implementation of compatibility Automotive Chassis Vol. 1: Components
conditions in modeling tubular joints using design. Springer.
brick and shell elements. Finite Elements in [23] Meznar, D., Lazovic, M. (2010). The strength
Analysis and Design, vol. 20, p. 127-138. of the bus structure with the determination
DOI:10.1016/0168-874X(95)00020-T. of critical points. Strojniski vestnik Journal
[18] ISO611 (2003). Road vehicles Braking of Mechanical Engineering, vol. 56, p. 544-
of automotive vehicles and their trailers- 550.
Vocabulary. International Organization for [24] Lan, F., Chen, J., Lin, J. (2004).
Standardization, Geneva. Comparative analysis for bus side
[19] Pacejka, H. (2005). Tyre and Vehicle structures and lightweight optimization.
Dinamycs, Elsevier, Amsterdam. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical
[20] Watanabe, K., Yamakawa, J., Tanaka, M., Engineers, Part D Journal of Automobile
Sasaki, T. (2007). Turning characteristics Engineering, vol. 218, p. 1067-1075,
of multi-axle vehicles. Journal of DOI:10.1177/095440700421801001.
Terramechanics, vol. 44, p. 81-87, [25] Kim, M.H., Suh, M.W., Bae, D.H. (2001).
DOI:10.1016/j.jterra.2006.01.007. Development of an optimum design
[21] Corno, M., Savaresi, S.M., Tanelli, technique for the bus window pillar
M., Fabbri, L. (2008). On optimal member. Proceedings of the Institution of
motorcycle braking. Control Engineering Mechanical Engineers, Part D Journal of
Practice, vol. 16, p. 644-657. Automobile Engineering, vol. 215, p. 11-20,
DOI:10.1016/j.conengprac.2007.08.001. DOI:10.1243/0954407011525421.

APPENDIX

Here below the comparison between constraints reactions and applied external loads is reported:
results are subdivided into the four kinds of loading cases, respectively for the A-chassis and B-chassis.
A-chassis B-chassis
3.2.1 GRAVITY ONLY 3.1.1 GRAVITY ONLY
CONSTRAINT NAME UNIT DIRECTION CONSTRAINT NAME UNIT DIRECTION
X Y Z X Y Z
LEFT FRONT N 1,554 -6,554 31,199 REAR AXLE N -25,796 1,185 103,090
RIGHT FRONT N 1,860 6,541 28,781 ARTICULATION N 25,796 -1,185 15,413
LEFT REAR N 11,363 -18,517 42,098
RIGHT REAR N 11,018 18,530 40,907
TOTAL REACTION N 25,795 0 142,985 TOTAL REACTION N 0 0 118,503
EXTERNAL LOAD N 25,796 0 142,987 EXTERNAL LOAD N 0 0 118,513
ERROR % 0.004 0.000 0.001 ERROR % 0.000 0.000 0.008
3.2.2 BRAKE 3.1.2 BRAKE
CONSTRAINT NAME UNIT DIRECTION CONSTRAINT NAME UNIT DIRECTION
X Y Z X Y Z
LEFT FRONT N -32,659 -12,976 41,133 REAR AXLE N 0 103 84,308
RIGHT FRONT N -32,098 12,976 38,219 ARTICULATION N -31,726 -103 34,193
LEFT REAR N 0 0 41,543
RIGHT REAR N 0 0 40,850
TOTAL REACTION N -64,757 0 161,745 TOTAL REACTION N -31,726 0 118,501
EXTERNAL LOAD N -64,764 0 161,767 EXTERNAL LOAD N -31,735 0 118,513
ERROR % 0.011 0.000 0.014 ERROR % 0.028 0.000 0.010
3.2.3 CORNERING 3.1.3 CORNERING
CONSTRAINT NAME UNIT DIRECTION CONSTRAINT NAME UNIT DIRECTION
X Y Z X Y Z
LEFT FRONT N 0 16,010 11,504 RHS REAR AXLE N 0 65,934 81,846
RIGHT FRONT N 0 30,689 49,680 LHS REAR AXLE N 0 5,542 21,292
LEFT REAR N 0 17,343 8123 ARTICULATION N 0 19,155 15,363
RIGHT REAR N 0 52,678 73,627
TOTAL REACTION N 0 116,720 142,934 TOTAL REACTION N 0 90,631 118,501
EXTERNAL LOAD N 0 116,723 142,937 EXTERNAL LOAD N 0 90,638 118,513
ERROR % 0.000 0.000 0.002 ERROR % 0.000 0.008 0.010
3.2.4 TORSION 3.1.4 TORSION
CONSTRAINT NAME UNIT DIRECTION CONSTRAINT NAME UNIT DIRECTION
X Y Z X Y Z
LEFT FRONT N 1,394 -3,575 59,909 REAR AXLE N -14,424 5,516 102,050
RIGHT REAR N 24,424 2,387 83,076 ARTICULATION N 14,424 -5,516 16,451
TOTAL REACTION N 25,818 -1,188 142,985 TOTAL REACTION N 0 0 118,501
EXTERNAL LOAD N 25,796 -1,185 142,987 EXTERNAL LOAD N 0 0 118,513
ERROR % 0.085 0.253 0.001 ERROR % 0.000 0.000 0.010

Structural Analysis of an Articulated Urban Bus Chassis via FEM: a Methodology Applied to a Case Study 809